Comments (53) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   ninety_nine_percent said, 4 months ago

   Michael, you are not being fair! The GOP has done the most damage to the constitution — they have sided with the millionaires and billionaires, not “We the people” remember the 99% issue? Maybe you are siding with the top 1% too?
2. 

   ARodney said, 4 months ago

   Nothing currently proposed violates the constitution. It just sets the allowable weapons of mass murder at a slightly lower level.
3. 

   Chillbilly said, 4 months ago

   Ha! What crap.
   .
   Anyone who’s progressive lives in daily aggravation that the president (who’s a constitutional lawyer) doesn’t challenge the Constitution enough.
   .
   Obama should be legislating by executive order until the people in Congress who were elected to legislate start doing so. That’s an intended check and balance.
4. 

   Bruce4671 said, 4 months ago

   @Chillbilly

   So you are then OK with a President that can decide what is good for you, what you can eat, what you can drink where you can live how much money you can make and how much of that you can keep? Just rule by fiat. You good with that?
   
   Go live in China. Or NYC.
5. 

   MortyForTyrant said, 4 months ago

   @ARodney

   My English is acceptable, I believe, but what would you say is the exact definition of “arms”? I know a saber is a “side-arm”, so it can’t just be guns. Then there are tanks, also called “armor”, but that might be a coincidence…

   -

   What I’m aiming at: what is the difference between a shoulder mounted Surface to Air Missile launcher and a one-shot Derringer – definition-wise. They both can be carried by a man and eject one projectile without reloading. But the SAM-launcher is not available at a gun shop (well, outside of GTA :-) ) and the Derringer is. There must be a law to make it so. Why can’t that law not also include the Bushmaster?
6. 

   jack75287 said, 4 months ago

   Ok I know I have been saying these two things till I am blue in the face but:

   1) There are more scary things then a nut with a rifle as horrible as it is to the people and families that are hurt. One being an over reaching government.
   2) Gun free zones are never safe. Only one of the mass shootings was not in a gun free zone.
7. 

   Nos Nevets said, 4 months ago

   If speech were more restricted and controlled, one life may be saved because people couldn’t lead others astray.
   If searches and seizures didn’t need warrants, we would be safer.
   If we could force people to confess, we could get more criminals off the street.
   If people couldn’t own guns legally, fewer crimninals could get hold of them.

   Why do we trade safety for freedom for the other enumerated rights, but run the 2nd amendment through different “logic” ?
8. 

   locoboilerguy said, 4 months ago

   If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom, and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too.
   W. Somerset Maugham
9. 

   Harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

   @HOWGOZIT

   HOWGOZIT said, about 1 hour ago
   @Chillbilly
   Constitution lawyer? Just another thing he is mediocre at Chilly.
   ya he so great he thinks this is a democracy, and that he was elected with a mandate to change the constitution.
10. 

    Harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

    @MortyForTyrant

    You are talking about a side arm vs “to bear arms” and yes they knew the difference in 1700’s
11. 

    Harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

    Yeh I said the “gun free zone” stickers should be bullet proof. To bad the loony libs do not understand the genius behind the Constitution that has made it somewhat bullet proof from the politicians who either do not understand it or just want to lie about it to the ignorant masses. If I hear one more right to bear arms means hunting…..
12. 

    Harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

    Obama to make his statement with children all around him. While the guys own kids have guys with guns protecting them in school.
13. 

    Kylie2112 said, 4 months ago

    Can you still go out and buy a gun? Yes. Any gun willy-nilly? No. Your rights are still there, it’s just a bigger pain in the ass.
    -
    Who of you that were pro-voter ID are now anti-gun IDs? (Because either way, it’s a right not technically being infringed, just a limitation on what you can legally obtain).
14. 

    Radish said, 4 months ago

    Ramirez has depicted how the NRA has shot up the constitution.
15. 

    Harleyquinn said, 4 months ago

    Obama is Barney Fife and thinks everyone only needs one bullet to protect.
16. Load 15 more comments. | Load the rest (38).